Kevin Warren named commissioner of the Big Ten Conference

#26
While I don't believe the rights will keep increasing at the current pace, and wouldn't be surprised if they drop, I don't think any drop will be caused by "less attractive" match-ups with Maryland and Rutgers.
Well it's "caused by" a number of factors, right? The overall trends in the industry is the biggest one, far bigger than the individual team effects, but remember, it's not just that the overall package is less attractive, it's also that it now has to be divided 14 ways instead of 12.

opening up NY & DC shouldn't be understated & currently this is still more about the Tier 1 rights than BTN money
Balderdash. Rutgers and Maryland are meaningless entities in those markets, especially Rutgers in NY. The play was a one-time heist to steal a dollar a month from every granny in the tri-state area who's never watched a college football game in her life. Credit to Jim Delany, he pulled off the heist and got his sack of money for the conference (while of course only further hastening the death of cable). Now he's leaving behind a weaker, more diluted, less meaningful brand to compete in a marketplace where having actually interested and engaged customers means more than backroom chicanery.
 
#27
Not really. He has experience with collegiate sports law, so maybe the Big Ten university presidents thought that was very beneficial for a commissioner going forward. I don't believe Jim Delany had any connection to the Big Ten prior to becoming commissioner, so that part would never have been a requirement.
Well, Warren played college basketball, but his only professional experience in college athletics was working for Mike Slive at Bond, Schoeneck & King from 1990-1991. Which from an Illini perspective would seem to be bad news. I would hope that someone in the Illini journalism universe will get the new Commissioner on the record regarding his work relationship with Slive and how that may have shaped his view of Illini athletics.
 
#28
you feel me, dog?
Elmhurst
Well, Warren played college basketball, but his only professional experience in college athletics was working for Mike Slive at Bond, Schoeneck & King from 1990-1991. Which from an Illini perspective would seem to be bad news. I would hope that someone in the Illini journalism universe will get the new Commissioner on the record regarding his work relationship with Slive and how that may have shaped his view of Illini athletics.
That's a stretch. A really, really big one.
 
#29
Balderdash. Rutgers and Maryland are meaningless entities in those markets, especially Rutgers in NY. The play was a one-time heist to steal a dollar a month from every granny in the tri-state area who's never watched a college football game in her life. Credit to Jim Delany, he pulled off the heist and got his sack of money for the conference (while of course only further hastening the death of cable). Now he's leaving behind a weaker, more diluted, less meaningful brand to compete in a marketplace where having actually interested and engaged customers means more than backroom chicanery.
This is missing the point...if you want to argue that every college is a meaningless entity in NYC that is fair, but here is a survey showing as Rutgers #1 in NYC of all colleges...but if you want to play in NYC this suggests Rutgers was the best play...& if you are truly arguing they are meaningless entities how did they get the BTN into the markets? Something doesn't fit there.
NYC metro area Fans

Here is an interactive Map, seems likely that above they are counting the NJ side of the river as NYC metropolitan area
Map

But the real point here is getting a NYC/DC area presence for the BTN will grow the brand in those areas, PSU, Mich, OSU & the real big money is not coming from selling BTN to Grandma, it is from selling Tier 1 rights to ESPN & Fox (and it grows the brand for ESPN/Fox as well)...as ESPN has the same problem of selling packages to Grandma Gritty there is certainly a risk of Tier 1 rights going down, but your evil twin was 100% sure the current contract was going to be a disaster & then when that contract hit record amounts the argument switched over to it was a short term sellout. There is clearly risks out there, I'm not promising anything in the next contract, but moving forward there are opportunities as well, the cable bubble hasn't popped as fast as many expected, streaming is growing, you and I paying more for ala carte packages, and I still think the biggest advantage the B1G has is having the joint network with Fox vs. every other conference going with ESPN, which I think gave Delaney additional leverage over ESPN. Diluting the brand is a valid concern just on the 14 vs 12 split, and we shouldn't forget both Rutgers/MD are still getting smaller sums so some of the 50+ million will go down as they come aboard, but the additional exposure in NYC/DC for Mich/OSU/PSU is also worth something, Rutgers/MD are worth something, owning Mich/OSU...vs Rutgers/MD is worth something.
 
#31
Michigan
I thought it was all about the student-athletes?
Heh, good one

Delaney will be missed. Seemed to be pretty savvy and a step ahead. That said, some of the strategic moves he made could fall apart with someone else running the show.

The conversation around Maryland and Rutgers seems to assume that you're best off with as many strong teams as possible in the conference. I think that's a bad assumption. The current playoff format means you want a top-heavy conference, but not 14 tOSUs. With as many heavy hitters as we already have, we're best off having teams with a strong fanbase for their relative performance. Rutgers and Maryland meet that bar nicely.

It's impressive that the BIG has out-earned the SEC on a per-school average. For SEC fans, football >= religion.
 
#32
The Transfer Portal
Now he's leaving behind a weaker, more diluted, less meaningful brand
But the fallacy here is to think that simply keeping the status quo was an option - I don't believe it was. So it's not just saying "We shouldn't have added Maryland and Rutgers" - you need to say who we could have plausibly added instead, because I'm pretty convinced we were going to 14 by hook or by crook. Also, as a general comment, I don't understand why people treat Maryland like Rutgers. Maryland has been fine.

(Here I will follow my own advice and say I would have preferred Pitt and Syracuse.)
 
Likes: FiveStar
#33
Woodridge, IL
But the fallacy here is to think that simply keeping the status quo was an option - I don't believe it was. So it's not just saying "We shouldn't have added Maryland and Rutgers" - you need to say who we could have plausibly added instead, because I'm pretty convinced we were going to 14 by hook or by crook. Also, as a general comment, I don't understand why people treat Maryland like Rutgers. Maryland has been fine.

(Here I will follow my own advice and say I would have preferred Pitt and Syracuse.)
Really curious who Delany would've targeted if he decided to go to 14 before the ACC and SEC. Because it was seemingly about expanding the BTN subscriber base, I don't think Pitt would've been seriously considered since they would've added nothing that PSU hadn't already covered. My guess it would've been between Syracuse, Maryland, Missouri, and Rutgers.
 
#34
if you want to argue that every college is a meaningless entity in NYC that is fair
Thank you. That is what I'm arguing and it's the truth.

if you are truly arguing they are meaningless entities how did they get the BTN into the markets? Something doesn't fit there.
Right, it's not as if the cable companies are stupid, badly run businesses that are now hemorrhaging the customers they only had via monopoly power.

But the real point here is getting a NYC/DC area presence for the BTN will grow the brand in those areas
BTN's ratings are basically zero. Especially for anything other than football and men's basketball, especially especially outside the historical footprint.

Also, in researching this post, I came across this, which I hadn't previously seen:

The new deal will enable Comcast to continue to offer Big Ten Network to customers in states with Big Ten universities (Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin). Subscribers to the company’s Xfinity cable tier (the majority of its cable footprint) who live in Delaware, the District of Columbia, and the Northern Virginia/Beltway area will also continue to receive the network given their proximity to Big Ten schools.

The companies also said in the coming months, customers outside of the Big Ten states will have access to the Big Ten Network as part of Comcast’s Sports and Entertainment package.
So New York and Connecticut are already out, and Delware, DC, and Northern Virginia are on an expanded basic package. It's already slipping away.


the real big money is not coming from selling BTN to Grandma, it is from selling Tier 1 rights to ESPN & Fox
They're both big money, at least they were. A buck a month from every breathing human in half the country is a heck of a revenue stream.

But the fallacy here is to think that simply keeping the status quo was an option - I don't believe it was.
Why not? Scared of Penn State moving to the ACC? Scared of the SEC swooping in and taking Maryland from under our noses?
 
#35
Why not? Scared of Penn State moving to the ACC?
That was a concern, especially with possible Big Ten expansion to the west. An ACC with Clemson, Florida State, Miami, Notre Dame and Penn State is a pretty solid core for a football television package and the conference could probably command tier 1 rights at Big Ten levels (not necessarily current Big Ten levels, but maybe).
 
#36
That was a concern, especially with possible Big Ten expansion to the west. An ACC with Clemson, Florida State, Miami, Notre Dame and Penn State is a pretty solid core for a football television package and the conference could probably command tier 1 rights at Big Ten levels (not necessarily current Big Ten levels, but maybe).
Seems extremely post-hoc to me (not accusing you, Delany whispered it to the press too).

But anyway, the Big Ten is weaker and more diffuse now than it would have been, why isn't that an even bigger risk now? The gravitational pull of PSU's age-old rivals Rutgers and Maryland?

This is true across so many dimensions in sports (and other parts of society besides), that the new savvy, insider, Moneyball revolution hot new thing people aren't telling you about is basically just straightforwardly attempting to do the obviously right thing.
 
#37
Thank you. That is what I'm arguing and it's the truth.



Right, it's not as if the cable companies are stupid, badly run businesses that are now hemorrhaging the customers they only had via monopoly power.

New York isn't listed because Comcast barely service NYC.


BTN's ratings are basically zero. Especially for anything other than football and men's basketball, especially especially outside the historical footprint.

Also, in researching this post, I came across this, which I hadn't previously seen:



So New York and Connecticut are already out, and Delware, DC, and Northern Virginia are on an expanded basic package. It's already slipping away.




They're both big money, at least they were. A buck a month from every breathing human in half the country is a heck of a revenue stream.



Why not? Scared of Penn State moving to the ACC? Scared of the SEC swooping in and taking Maryland from under our noses?
 
#39
Cary, IL
Really curious who Delany would've targeted if he decided to go to 14 before the ACC and SEC. Because it was seemingly about expanding the BTN subscriber base, I don't think Pitt would've been seriously considered since they would've added nothing that PSU hadn't already covered. My guess it would've been between Syracuse, Maryland, Missouri, and Rutgers.
I would toss UT and T A&M on the list of wants. But Texas has too good a situation for themselves, if they can keep it together.